Roman Units

[Swoosh So]

Anyone know? Also what units do you think they could include like nothing weve seen b4?, Chariots?

[ShadeFlanders]

I just know the obvious one:
rank and file legionaires: armed with "spear" (forgot the right word), short sword (gladius?) and tower shield. Medium armour, high discipline and morale.

[Cooperman]

Just hoping I can play as the celts and drive the roman legions back into the english channel

[CBR]

Velites would have to be there, No or light armor with javelins working as skirmishers.


CBR

[monkian]

Celts

We be fond of war http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/mad.gif

[Swoosh So]

Sounds like the same old stuff, Just recolour the normal units and we would have rome totalwar http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/frown.gif

[Kas]

Roman spear/javelin=pilum.

Not just a simple spear.

a small hardened steel point(armour piercing), a long soft steel shaft that will bent on impact so the "receiver" can't throw it back nor cut it off...a shield with a pilum in it becomes useless. behind the steel shaft a wooden "block" and sometimes a lead ball...to give it more weight (more range and impact). behind this a medium sized wooden shaft to give it a good balance and balistics.

Only used as a missile, 2 pp were carried into battle.
http://198.144.2.125/Roman/Small/pilumshaftSML.jpg

Kas http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/biggrin.gif

[CBR]

Well in a way it will the same old stuff as STW and MTW: units fighting hand to hand equipped with swords or spears. If you really want something different you would have to go into the age of firearms.

But it depends a lot on what CA does to the combat system. Javelin armed skirmishers played an important role on the battlefield. Cavalry should be different too compared to MTW.

That combat is as realistic and historically accurate as possible without ruining gameplay is important to me. And the more CA makes it that way the more we can see the changes.

If its just another simple rock/scissor/paper system then yes it would most likely be the same old stuff just with different/better graphics.

CBR

[CBR]

And ofc we should not forget elephants, there you have something never seen before http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/biggrin.gif

Depending on what eras we can play we might see some chariots I dont know..

CBR

[monkian]

Celts on chariots- bloody thaaasaaands of 'em http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/eek.gif

[Kraxis]

Needless to say:

PERSIAN HEAVY CAVALRY

I believe they are the ones we can see trampling the Legionnaires in the shot we can enlarge.

[Rosacrux]

Macedonian phalanx... Hoplites... Spartan Hoplites... hetairoi cavalry... hypaspists... thessalian cavalry... prodromoi ippis... Cretan archers... Rhodian slingers... hellenistic kataphraktoi... endless possibilities - and I am only talking Greece here http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/smile.gif

[Kas]

Parthian Cav Archers, Roman Clibanarri Heavy Cav.

Some new formations would be nice, psychology like hatred, fear, stuborn and frenzy also.

Kas http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/biggrin.gif

[CBR]

Yes we really need more than just loose/close/wedge for units. Call it shieldwall or dense (has already been mentioned in the cavalry threads for mtw) Spear/pike units formed up in very close order.

A Macedonian type pike phalanx would be nearly invincible from the front but slow to advance and turn. Irregular(spear) units might not be able to move at all.

IIRC one screenshot showed roman units in testudo formation so it looks like CA has done something. Hopefully they get it right http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/biggrin.gif

CBR

[Swoosh So]

Um are there ingame screenshots? Those screenies look like the start video

[CBR]

Yes it looks like an intro. Im just being optimistic: if they have it in the intro video they would have it the game too http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/wacko.gif

CBR

[monkian]

They are the start video- not in game


Quote[/b] ]psychology like hatred, fear, stuborn and frenzy also.

This is Total War- not Warhammer http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/biggrin.gif

[Knight_Yellow]

Well maybe just maybe instead of ur king/hiers always being on horse back u could have the option of making him a foot troop with an elite unit of Pretorians as his men.

Also i want the celts. (But the sad truth was that if the romans had wanted to conquer scotland then they would have.)

and since i live about 600 feet away from antonine wall (designed to keep the celts in scotland) and various other historical places (roman forts ,"murder" holes) i know a good bit about the celts and how the romans reacted to them.

[monkian]

The Scottish Celts that fought the Romans were called the Picts weren't they ? http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/dizzy.gif

And 'murder holes' are in relation to Medieval Castles -the defenders could drop objects on the attackers beneath them.

[Jacque Schtrapp]

Speaking of castles, I'd like to see a serious improvement in the way sieges are played out. More siege interaction including the use of fire would be sweet. I also think siege times should be dramatically increased and incentive given to ending the siege by force. I think that would add a whole new depth to either M:TW or a new TW game.

[Divine Wind]

Big fat elephants is what i want

Then all i need is a flying pig for my airbourne division
http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/joker.gif

[Exile]

Goths, VisiGoths, Vandals, Huns...I'm not sure exactly how their armies were made up, troopwise. The Empire spanned a long time in history, I wonder if CA will try to cover everything or just the early era. Then there'd be Carthaginians and maybe you-know-who

[Tmscience]

What kind of troops would the Huns have?

[Emp. Conralius]

The Hun army mostly consisted of cavalry. They had excellent horse archers and heavy cav. They also usually had a large amount of reserve infantry from other conquered nations.

[Knight_Yellow]

the thing i love the most about the romans was that they were a city state not a country. and they took on the whole "known" world and won.

plus it wasnt an enemy army at the gates etc. that made rome fall it was a succesive line of mentally unstable ceasers, witch forced the empire into self destruction.

now u gotta admire them for that.

just imajin though wat would have happened if rome hadent have fallen.......

one can only dream. http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/smile.gif

[Lehesu]

If Rome had never fallen, we would read signs such as "Welcome to Scotland, Province of Rome."

[Kongamato]

How are all of the non-Roman factions that all of you are begging to play as going to be included on a campaign scale? Some of them may prove to be too nomadic or undeveloped to play as. How will CA implement factions on a tribal scale as opposed to traditional factions with borders, public works, taxes, and conscription?

[TheViking]

Dont really care, cus it would be what someone else already said: same kind of units with dif stats and look.

What would be nice:
* to controll more then 16 units each on the field 26-32 maybe. atleast 20 each.
* much more better diplomatic.
* more tactics then loose, wedge and hold formation and stuff like that.

[Stormer]

All i want i the Roman Legionaaires to do formation like the turtle http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/biggrin.gif

[Nelson]

I am most curious to know if the legions will differ pre and post Marius. Prior to Marius the triarii should look and behave like phalanx troops armed with thrusting spears.

[Emp. Conralius]

Though, for the most part, we ae in the dark abou the exact perios in which the game will span, I don't think that it will go as far as the dark ages. But thats just my opinion, I could be wrong http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/smile.gif

Since the new TW is promising a new completely 3d engine with motion capture, I wouldn't think that the Turtle formation would be out of the question.

I hope that when it comes to the hoplites, they dont make them like some of the other units in MTW, like say th Saracen Infantry. I hope the make the hoplites more of an offensive shock troop then just another polearms unit with it's stats reading "good defence." How about some thrusting motions huh?

[The Marcher Lord]

The testudo/turtle formation is a must have - they show it on the intro. movie so I would expect it to be in the game. Chariots are definately essential too for the Celts and Egyptians.

Hopefully we will get moveable siege towers, perhaps with mounted artillery (?)

I wonder if we will get the chance to sprinkle some caltrops - the nasty little spikes that slowed a cavalry charge.

It would be great to see some of the exotic Roman auxiliary units such as the armoured Sarmatian cavalry/archers and Balearic slingers. The late empire Sassanid Persian clibanarii and cataphracts were the most heavily armoured guys on the battlefield, the tanks of their time, and it would be great to see them also.

What about sea battles ? I fancy ramming and boarding some enemy triremes/quinquiremes or simply having an artillery shoot out between two ships with mounted ballistae......The possibilities are endless

[Xiahou]

Don't assume anything from an intro- take the MTW intro as an example... a number of things shown in it are not in the game.

As a side, I hope this nonsense about being able to build wonders (pyramids in particular) isnt true.

[Draksen]

Quote[/b] (Kongamato @ Jan. 01 2003,00:05)]How are all of the non-Roman factions that all of you are begging to play as going to be included on a campaign scale? Some of them may prove to be too nomadic or undeveloped to play as. How will CA implement factions on a tribal scale as opposed to traditional factions with borders, public works, taxes, and conscription?
Kangamato is right...
would be interesting to know how they will do that...

btw,
roman units :

hastatus legionnarii
(first line, light infantry, throwing pilums)
principes legionnarii
(second line, heavy infantry, shield+sword)
triarius legionnarii
(third line, pikes)

auxilia cavalry
auxilia archers

[Nelson]

IIRC,

Velites were the skirmishers.

Hastati and principes were armed with pila, a gladius and a shield. They differed in age somewhat with the hastati being the younger. These first two lines were expected to win the battle.

The triarii in the third line were similar to hoplites in that they carried a shield and a one handed thrusting spear (the hasta). They did not use two handed pikes. Committing triarii to battle could only mean that things were going badly for the boys from Rome.

[jLan]

I want the greek units like Hoplites, Hypaspists and Toxotes

Plus the Roman legions will hopefully be great.. Anyway, I'm really looking forward to this, and I hope we get loads of new stuff, especially in the diplomacy area... being able to plan attacks with allies would be great.. Imagine tricking your ally into attacking an enemy, only to have made a plan with that enemy and backstab your original ally? Stuff like that would be really great.. and having a sorta reputation.. quick to cancel alliances, or faithfull.. stuff like that.

Also, more psychologic effects.. Like the Romans often fought better the fewer they became... or the closer to Rome they were, the better they fought.. stuff like that. Having morale also have to do with your country's size and strength, etc. Maybe hard to incorporate, but would be fun as hell..

[ShadeFlanders]

I wanna see Franks with throwing axes and heavy cavalry.

[Catiline]

Depends totally on the period really.

As to Egyptians having chariots in this period that's nonsense. Ptolemaic Egypt used pretty much the same army that Alexander the Great did, big pike phalanxes. The only chariots we should see are perhaps Seleucid ones and those for British celts. The seleucids were rahtre ineffective, the British ones were taxis rather than fighting platforms. They were also obsolete.

The screens show a proper dogs dinner of unit types. 1st century AD legions fighting 5th century BC Greeks. Hopefully htat won't be the case, but I'd not be surprised.

[Psyco]

The one thing they need to put in Rome: Total War is better diplomicy(sp)

[jLan]

Agreed Psyco. Diplomacy can make sooo much of a game.

[YunDog]

WAR ELEPHANTS [B] http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/biggrin.gif http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/biggrin.gif http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/biggrin.gif http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/biggrin.gif http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/biggrin.gif http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/biggrin.gif http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/biggrin.gif

[The Marcher Lord]

Catiline has it right on the chariots - after checking the Ptolemaic army details it appears chariots were only in use for ceremonial events in Egypt during that time. The Brits did use them in battle, but only for show and they were not really a tactical unit. The Mithridatic campaign did see some use of chariots in battle and the Cyrenians (Libya) also used them to a limited extent.

The testudo does look more feasible as an in-game feature now that we have that in-game screenshot of the legionaries scaling a city wall on ladders with shields held above their heads. It would be a matter of a simple formation mouse click to put a unit into a testudo.

[Emp. Conralius]

Sorry if I'm bringing up an old topic, but the Macedonian Phalanx used long, 2-handed pikes with the men's shields strapped on to their arms or shoulders. And, as we all know, it was the Macedonian Phalanx that beat the Greek ones.


I wonder if Masada would be a fort yo could siege...but as far as units go, I want to see the diffrent variations of the Legion, all Greek or Macedonian units, the Egyptions (I hope they were those head-dresses), and of course...ELEPHANTS

[Swoosh So]

How would the elephants be employed in battle? surely not in units? dident they have archers on them? How about an elephant mounted napatha thrower http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/smile.gif

[The Marcher Lord]

Judging by the in-game screens there appear to be both heavily armoured and unarmoured elephants in the game and they appear to be moving in mixed single unit blocks (close formation) or in a strung out line (loose formation) I would expect them to be a shock unit with only a very short useful life on the battlefield

[Sjakihata]

http://www.redrampant.com/

there you go, should include some inf units, and more cav. Those could be included as units of the romans.

[Emp. Conralius]

what in-game screens? are you talking about those first screens that came out a little while ago?

[The Marcher Lord]

Conralius - go to the post titled Next TW game is Rome TW in the Entrance Hall forums and go to page 8. The post by Seljuksinan contains all of the known screens to date.

[Davout]

The beauty of the ancient period is the dramatic differences in tactics required by different nations since each army was based on completely different troop types – Heavy Infantry vs Barbarian vs Horse Archer vs Armoured Cavalry.

I hope that Creative Assembly capture the full distinctiveness possible that will ensure longevity and enthralling tactical gameplay by limiting each nation to their historic troop types, with a few allies/mercenaries to soften the edges. All the Western nations in MTW play very similarly on the battlefield. Imagine having to learn fundamentally different tactics for each of Arab, Carthaginian, Celt, Franks, Gaul, Goth, Greek, Hun, Indian, Macedonian, Ostrogoth, Palmyran, Parthian Persian, Pyrrhic, Roman, Sassanid, Scythian, Seleucid, Syracusan Thracian, Vandal…………..And having to dramatically change your army composition and tactics for every different foe

Does anyone know of any forums established where the developers of TW3 will participate to get our ideas in at the formative stage?

[Magyar Khan]

well if they cant create a shooting horsearcher while gallopping then they shoot put in teh corner. http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/argue.gif

[Magyar Khan]

well if they cant create a shooting horsearcher while gallopping then they shoot put in teh corner. http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/argue.gif

[Magyar Khan]

the add on will be

Hannibal, and at that moment u will see war elephants not sooner

[Psyco]

You would also need Macidonian cavalry with thier *super seceret, super special formation*
(in case your wondering what it looks like, its like this...) .=cavalryman
.
. .
. . .
. . . .
. . .
. .
.
only a lot bigger

[Gaius Julius]

I would like to see:
Imperial Legionary(lorica segmentata)
Centurion
Syrian Auxiliary Archers
Cavalry(ala)
Scorpio/Ballista
Siege Tower
Chariots
Elephants

I know, I'm asking for way too much. http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/rolleyes.gif

[Rosacrux]

Psyco

I know I am nitpicking as hell, but that formation is the famous "Thessalian romvos" and it was never used by the Macedonian cavarly, only by the Thessalian cavalry.

The macedonian cavalry fought in standard wench formation, something like this:

........
.....
...
.

Yes, like the wench formation in TW.

[Lord of the Isles]

Quote[/b] (monkian @ Dec. 31 2002,14:00)]The Scottish Celts that fought the Romans were called the Picts weren't they ? http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/dizzy.gif

The Picts were a people separate from the Celts. The Scottish Celts arrived from Ireland to settle in the West of Scotland, setting up the Kingdom of Dal Riata (or Dalriada). The two peoples sometimes fought, sometimes coexisted and merged to an extent. The two Kingdoms of Picts and Scots (Dal Riata) are considered to have been joined in 843 (or 841 in some sources) by Kenneth MacAlpin, the first King of a unified Scotland.

[A.Saturnus]

Wench formation http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/eek.gif
do I get this right???

[Leet Eriksson]

SYRIAN ARCHERStake over syria and you get a UU for the romans http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/biggrin.gif much like bulgarian brigands i would say.i wanna see arab legionnares i remember the romans employed arabs in their armies(they were Ghasanids,there domain spanned modern jorden and parts of southern syria).

[All_the_Sultan's_horses]

i do wonder if some of Rome's enemies will really be viable as factions. many, esp the Celts and Germans, were only lightly or unarmoured infantry who often fought in open formation. Think of the difficulty in MTW tt the Muslims have with armoured Catholic infantry later in the game and u'll realize the serious problems tt the "barbarians" would have with the Roman legions. and the Celts and Germans had no shock cavalry either. the stirrup had not yet reached europe

[fenir]

Oi

Nothing wrong with a formation of Wenches,

enough to bring a glad tear to the eye of an old soldier.
http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/biggrin.gif


fenir http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/smokin.gif

[Nord]

Quote[/b] (Gaius Julius @ Jan. 07 2003,23:46)]I would like to see:
Imperial Legionary(lorica segmentata)
Centurion
Syrian Auxiliary Archers
Cavalry(ala)
Scorpio/Ballista
Siege Tower
Chariots
Elephants

I know, I'm asking for way too much. http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/rolleyes.gif
Nah, looks like a reasonable list... alot of which can be seen in the screenshots and trailer already http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/smile.gif

[roisinlee]

Things I wanna see (Not just units but things that effect the units only):

1. No more rank editing. Just personal preference but the idea that a single line of troops is the most effective way to fight seems a little silly. (Lots of groups of a hundred men in a straight line :P)

Should be replaced with simple formations. (Column for marching, the old wedge etc... Maybe even flanking manouveurs that split a unit in half)

With the rank editing - players just work out the optimum formation and thats all you ever see.

2. I doubt we'll be going back this far but around 350 BC a bow was invented that was fired from lying on one's back and using ones feet to give greater power when drawing it. It'd look amusing. http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/smile.gif (Reckon the game will probably start at 750 BC)

3. Maybe the ability to arm your own soldiers. (Your average Roman soldier had several weapons, plus there are many different versions of armor/arms that are similar but with minor differences.) Not going to hold my breath for this one.

4. Flexibility. Little quirks like... Say if you take over Briton as Rome, your soldiers in Briton will become used to the temprature over time - even to the point they perhaps loathe the heat. It'd add a new strategic element.

And just an interesting lil fact to whoever made the comment about brit chariots and to whoever talked about Rome vs Briton. Rome and Briton did spend a considerble time at war, Romans however couldn't handle the cold. A standard tactic among the Romans was to rub themselves delibrately with nettles. The warm pain was more favorable than the cold.

Also the Britons used chariots to fairly decent effect. A Brit warrior could run along the central shaft of a British chariot and strike at the foe before moving back to the body. This was done while moving at speed too. Fairly impressive even by stunt car driver standards. http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/smile.gif

[Hakonarson]

One troop type that hasn't been seen much of or mentioned is Equites - Roman cavalry, and their equivalent opponents.

Half-armoured cavalry on unarmoured horses with shields and armed with a pair of javelin-spears - ie small enough to be thrown, stout enough to be retained hand to hand.

Similar cavalry were the standard through the ancient era in most places in Europe - Spain, Gaul & Germany. In the east bow armed cavalry were the norm.

Similar unarmoured "light" cavalry would be similar to Jinetes, although there were types that did not fight hand-to-hand such as Numidians.

There will be various types of infantry - many tribes and nations had troops armed in similar styles that fought differently - for example Spanish Celtiberians were famous for tehir charge much like other Celts, but their neighbouring spanish tribes tended to favour throwing javelins and only getting "stuck in" when the enemy became disordered.

Also slingers should make an appearance, imitation legionaries used by some Asiatic states (depending upon what dates are covered), specialised skirmishers that do not ever fight in close formation (they should be in MTW too&#33http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/wink.gif, Cataphracts should be a bit different from Byzantine ones (half or un-armoured horses, bow, sometimes lance but not always (eg Sassanids)), and Clibanarii will/should be more like Byz Kataphractoi - fully armoured men on fully armoured horses.

the "lance" of teh time was the Kontos - a long 2-handed spear, so no shields for cavalry using it.

Hopefully more skirmishing formations - especially the cantabrian circle and some sort of galloping action for horse archers although stationary horse archery is appropriate for the Sassanid Persians.

BTW "Centurions" were not a seperate troop type - AoE notwithstanding so if we see them then CA wil have well and truly f**ked up their history

[Stephen Hummell]

i'd like to see the barbarian units. to see the hordes of germans bring rome to it's knees would bring a tear to my eye.


FORZA ROMA

[Leet Eriksson]

Quote[/b] (All_the_Sultan's_horses @ Jan. 08 2003,23:31)]i do wonder if some of Rome's enemies will really be viable as factions. many, esp the Celts and Germans, were only lightly or unarmoured infantry who often fought in open formation. Think of the difficulty in MTW tt the Muslims have with armoured Catholic infantry later in the game and u'll realize the serious problems tt the "barbarians" would have with the Roman legions. and the Celts and Germans had no shock cavalry either. the stirrup had not yet reached europe
treat them much like you would do with muslims,flank,flank and flank.although late period is a problem for muslims its still possible to defeat catholic infantry(unless your turks where there their main strength is in late http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/tongue.gif)well rome would have other enemies not only celts and germans,you still have egypt(chariots,axemen,slingers etc etc)and persia(mostly skirmishers and archers)but they are a bit tricky to control i think.also Europe is heavily forested in that time,it would be aproblem for romans becuase they ain't good in guerrilla wars,the only problem is luring those damn barbarians out of their forests http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/dizzy.gif